It would have been nice to beat one if the California schools, but let's face it. Furd, SC, and UCLA are the class of the conference right now.

Of the 5 losses, 4 were on the road. All 5 losses were to teams that were better, more talented, have more expensive coaches, and we're favored against us going into the season and into the games against us. All 5 teams also spent time ranked in the top 10 at some point in the season.

The coaches have turned things around in terms of academics and culture and improved the win total these past 2 years. They've done it with walk-on left tackles, JC plug-ins, converted QB safeties, and athletically limited guys like Hardy Nickerson, Stefan McClure and Cedric Dozier.

Just not getting why everyone is so down on the coaching staff. In the grand scheme of the history of Cal football, this is not that bad of a period.

We're probably a couple of talented OTs and some improved speed on defense from really making noise in the conference. And, this season has gone well enough, especially if we win the bowl game, that we should be able to add some talented athletes in the offseason.

+1

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603781 said:

---

All 5 losses were to teams that were better, more talented, have more expensive coaches, and we're favored against us going into the season and into the games against us.

---

David Shaw's salary is the same as Dykes'.

Golden One;842603830 said:

---

David Shaw's salary is the same as Dykes'.

---

Not quite. Gets about a quarter million more, at least this year.
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603781 said:

---

It would have been nice to beat one if the California schools, but let's face it. Furd, SC, and UCLA are the class of the conference right now.

Of the 5 losses, 4 were on the road. All 5 losses were to teams that were better, more talented, have more expensive coaches, and we're favored against us going into the season and into the games against us. All 5 teams also spent time ranked in the top 10 at some point in the season.

The coaches have turned things around in terms of academics and culture and improved the win total these past 2 years. They've done it with walk-on left tackles, JC plug-ins, converted QB safeties, and athletically limited guys like Hardy Nickerson, Stefan McClure and Cedric Dozier.

Just not getting why everyone is so down on the coaching staff. In the grand scheme of the history of Cal football, this is not that bad of a period.

We're probably a couple of talented OTs and some improved speed on defense from really making noise in the conference. And, this season has gone well enough, especially if we win the bowl game, that we should be able to add some talented athletes in the offseason.

---

Sounds reasonable, but I disagree.

Wazzu beat UCLA and Oregon this season, and should have beaten Furd. They beat $C a couple of years ago. There is no reason why Sonny, TFS and Kaufman should not have been expected to win 1 or 2 out of that 4 game gaunlet + Furd -- in a payoff season. But we won 0. We're not saying sweep. We're saying win a few. 0-12 against those teams in the last three seasons is just not acceptable. That said, I know the reality of things and that Sonny will get his extension. I never wish us to lose ever (whether I think it's the right coach or not). So I will support him and expect him to get to the next level during his tenure here. Tonight's win was a lot of fun. I will finally enjoy reviewing a game on DVR knowing a successful outcome. Go Bears!

KoreAmBear;842603845 said:

---

Sounds reasonable, but I disagree.

Wazzu beat UCLA and Oregon this season, and should have beaten Furd. They beat $C a couple of years ago. There is no reason why Sonny, TFS and Kaufman should not have been expected to win 1 or 2 out of that 4 game gaunlet + Furd -- in a payoff season. But we won 0. We're not saying sweep. We're saying win a few. 0-12 against those teams in the last three seasons is just not acceptable. That said, I know the reality of things and that Sonny will get his extension. I never wish us to lose ever (whether I think it's the right coach or not). So I will support him and expect him to get to the next level during his tenure here. Tonight's win was a lot of fun. I will finally enjoy reviewing a game on DVR knowing a successful outcome. Go Bears!

---

What are you disagreeing with exactly? Negativity doesn't suit you, KoreAmBear. Come back to the good side of the force.

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603882 said:

---

What are you disagreeing with exactly? Negativity doesn't suit you, KoreAmBear. Come back to the good side of the force.

---

I'm always positive when it comes to each game -- before and during each game I think we're going to win, until we don't. But I'm disagreeing with the notion that Sonny did a good job this year under the circumstances. I think he did a passable job, and I will give him credit for coaching a nice comeback win tonight. However, he has not done a good job against most of the schools that we need to beat to get to the next level. So being shutout v. those teams I mentioned, and being 0-12 v. California Pac-12 and Oregon, is not acceptable. So I disagree that you think all in all Sonny did a good job. Quite frankly you provided him with a lot of excuses (road games, better talent, etc.). At least win one of those games against the upper division type teams. I'm not asking for a sweep. I referred to Wazzu as an example of getting it done at times with inferior talent.

KoreAmBear;842603888 said:

---

Again, each game I think we're going to win, until we don't. But I'm disagreeing with the notion that Sonny did a good job under the circumstances. I think he did a passable job and I will give him credit for coaching a nice comeback win tonight. However, he has not done a good job against most of the schools that we need to beat to get to the next level. So being shutout v. those teams I mentioned, and being 0-12 v. California Pac-12 and Oregon, is not acceptable. So I disagree that you think all in all Sonny did a good job.

---

Those 4 teams are the 4 best teams in the conference and have far superior talent than Cal. Did you see walkon Brian Farley trying to guard DeForest Buckner? Or, Christian McCaffrey, Royce Freeman and Paul Perkins running right by Hardy Nickerson? Or, Thomas Duarte and Juju Smith doing whatever they want against Cedric Dozier and Stefan McClure? I'm not saying that Dykes has done an amazing job, but the biggest issue right now is the talent gap, not coaching. Overall, things aren't looking so bad that people should be calling for Dykes' head. That's all I'm saying.

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603908 said:

---

Those 4 teams are the 4 best teams in the conference and have far superior talent than Cal. Did you see walkon Brian Farley trying to guard DeForest Buckner? Or, Christian McCaffrey, Royce Freeman and Paul Perkins running right by Hardy Nickerson? Or, Thomas Duarte and Juju Smith doing whatever they want against Cedric Dozier and Stefan McClure? I'm not saying that Dykes has done an amazing job, but the biggest issue right now is the talent gap, not coaching. Overall, things aren't looking so bad that people should be calling for Dykes' head. That's all I'm saying.

---

hes not recruiting more talent though either in terms of closing the gap. he can still out coach them, but he hasnt shown that he can

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603908 said:

---

Those 4 teams are the 4 best teams in the conference and have far superior talent than Cal. Did you see walkon Brian Farley trying to guard DeForest Buckner? Or, Christian McCaffrey, Royce Freeman and Paul Perkins running right by Hardy Nickerson? Or, Thomas Duarte and Juju Smith doing whatever they want against Cedric Dozier and Stefan McClure? I'm not saying that Dykes has done an amazing job, but the biggest issue right now is the talent gap, not coaching. Overall, things aren't looking so bad that people should be calling for Dykes' head. That's all I'm saying.

---

I still disagree, but what you say is fair. One note, though, I think McClure is not overmatched at all at S (maybe last year recovering from injuries). He's a sure tackler and has made plays all year, including a very athletic pass breakup in the end zone tonight.

KoreAmBear;842603845 said:

---

Sounds reasonable, but I disagree.

Wazzu beat UCLA and Oregon this season, and should have beaten Furd. They beat $C a couple of years ago. There is no reason why Sonny, TFS and Kaufman should not have been expected to win 1 or 2 out of that 4 game gaunlet + Furd -- in a payoff season. But we won 0. We're not saying sweep. We're saying win a few. 0-12 against those teams in the last three seasons is just not acceptable. That said, I know the reality of things and that Sonny will get his extension. I never wish us to lose ever (whether I think it's the right coach or not). So I will support him and expect him to get to the next level during his tenure here. Tonight's win was a lot of fun. I will finally enjoy reviewing a game on DVR knowing a successful outcome. Go Bears!

---

I agree...and I disagree.

I agree, that, of course we should win one or two of those games. It's really odd that we can't...

But...it's totally understandable.

Sttanford, UCLA, USC and Oregon -- as mentioned above -- are really good teams, even with one of them not having a head coach.

At least some of those teams could be really sh!tty during the Tedford era. But those teams are damn tough to beat nowadays.

-------------

Wait... but Wazzou beat 3 of those teams in the recent past...

Yeah, but Wazzou doesn't have the same connection that we do with USC (which, I believe they don't play every year) and Stanford. Oregon may be a different story.

But Wazzou has been at the bottom of the barrel for a long time, so it's not surpising that when they get some muscle, they could knock people out. What do they have to lose?

-------------

So let's get to the Big 4, one by one:

Startng with: USC:

Cal has beaten USC approximately 1 time in the past 15 seasons.

And that sole win took 3 overtimes to accomplish.

Sure, those losses included many from the Pete Carroll era.

But we're 0-3 vs. Lane Kiffin's Trojans.

And 0-2 vs. interim USC head coaches.

I believe there is a psycholigical hump that Cal has with USC, and it's passed on from team to team.

And I don't believe a Cal football team that was still figuring out how to be a winning team is/was able to get over that psycholigcal barrier.

-------------

Now: UCLA.

I also think there's a psychological hump when it comes to playing in L.A.

Cal has won 1 game in L.A. in the past 15 seasons.

Cal went 0-3 vs. Karl Dorrell's Bruins at the Rose Bowl.

Even Aaron Rodgers couldn't win in L.A.

Again, this is another psychological barrier that I don't believe the 2015 Cal football team was ready to get over.

-------------

Stanford

Stanford is the best team in the conference and one of the best teams in the nation.

Even if they looked beatable last week, this was not the Cal team that was going to beat them.

Even with Goff at the helm, you would need a much superior/veteran team to pull off such an upset.

So it's understandable that we lost.

-------------

Oregon

Utah and Washington State tramped over them, but those two teams don't have the same connection that we do to Oregon.

An Oregon-Cal game is considered somewhat of a rivalry.

Oregon is still a good team, and it's totally understandable that they'd kick our butts.

-------------

Utah

I can't explain Utah. Perhaps the pressure of College Gameday and being ranked for the first time in a long time and Jared Goff taking the time off to film not one but two ESPN featurettes had a role in it.

-------------

In closing, beating our California rivals is hard.

It's even harder when those 3 teams are really, really good.

You know how hard it is to beat our California rivals?

As I mentioned in another thread...

The last time Cal beat USC, UCLA and Stanford in the same season was the year that Joe Kapp led the Bears to the Rose Bowl.

gobears725;842603913 said:

---

hes not recruiting more talent though either in terms of closing the gap. he can still out coach them, but he hasnt shown that he can

---

Hard to do that when you're not winning. Let's see what he can do this recruiting cycle to close the gap.

KoreAmBear;842603845 said:

---

Sounds reasonable, but I disagree.

Wazzu beat UCLA and Oregon this season, and should have beaten Furd. They beat $C a couple of years ago. There is no reason why Sonny, TFS and Kaufman should not have been expected to win 1 or 2 out of that 4 game gaunlet + Furd -- in a payoff season. But we won 0. We're not saying sweep. We're saying win a few. 0-12 against those teams in the last three seasons is just not acceptable. That said, I know the reality of things and that Sonny will get his extension. I never wish us to lose ever (whether I think it's the right coach or not). So I will support him and expect him to get to the next level during his tenure here. Tonight's win was a lot of fun. I will finally enjoy reviewing a game on DVR knowing a successful outcome. Go Bears!

---

I agree...and I disagree.

I agree, that, of course we should win one or two of those games. It's really odd that we can't...

But...it's totally understandable.

Sttanford, UCLA, USC and Oregon -- as mentioned above -- are really good teams, even with one of them not having a head coach.

At least some of those teams could be really sh!tty during the Tedford era. But all those teams are damn tough to beat nowadays.

-------------

Wait... but Wazzou beat 3 of those teams in the recent past...

Yeah, but Wazzou doesn't have the same connection that we do with USC (which, I believe they don't play every year) and Stanford. Oregon may be a different story.

But Wazzou has been at the bottom of the barrel for a long time, so it's not surpising that when they get some muscle, they could knock people out. What do they have to lose?

-------------

So let's get to the Big 4, one by one:

Startng with: USC:

Cal has beaten USC approximately 1 time in the past 15 seasons.

And that sole win took 3 overtimes to accomplish.

Sure, those losses included many from the Pete Carroll era.

But we're 0-3 vs. Lane Kiffin's Trojans.

And 0-2 vs. interim USC head coaches.

I believe there is a psycholigical hump that Cal has with USC, and it's passed on from team to team.

And I don't believe our current Cal football team, which was still figuring out how to be a winning team, is/was able to get over that psycholigcal barrier.

-------------

UCLA.

I also think there's a psychological hump when it comes to playing in L.A.

Cal has won 1 game in L.A. in the past 15 seasons.

Cal went 0-3 vs. Karl Dorrell's Bruins at the Rose Bowl.

Even Aaron Rodgers couldn't win in L.A.

Again, this is another psychological barrier that I don't believe the 2015 Cal football team was ready to get over.

-------------

Stanford

Stanford is the best team in the conference and one of the best teams in the nation.

Even if they looked beatable last week, this was not the Cal team that was going to beat them.

Even with Goff at the helm, you would need a much superior/veteran team to pull off such an upset.

So it's understandable that we lost.

-------------

Oregon

Utah and Washington State tramped over them, but those two teams don't have the same connection that we do to Oregon.

An Oregon-Cal game is considered somewhat of a rivalry.

Oregon is still a good team, and it's totally understandable that they'd kick our butts.

-------------

Utah

I can't explain Utah. Perhaps the pressure of College Gameday and being ranked for the first time in a long time and Jared Goff taking the time off to film not one but two ESPN featurettes had a role in it.

-------------

In closing, beating our California rivals is hard.

It's even harder when those 3 teams are really, really good.

You know how hard it is to beat our California rivals?

As I mentioned in another thread...

The last time Cal beat USC, UCLA and Stanford in the same season was the year that Joe Kapp led the Bears to the Rose Bowl.

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603928 said:

---

Hard to do that when you're not winning. Let's see what he can do this recruiting cycle to close the gap.

---

numberwise hes recruited about 80% of the class right now. even if he closed with all 4 stars, its about the same as last year. theres no see what you can do here, hes already lost this game.

the only way ill back off on his recruiting is if he picks up an assistant known for their recruiting in the offseason. right our best recruiter was a graduate assistant a year ago. we don't have a closer on this staff. we need a tosh without the tosh baggage.

KoreAmBear;842603916 said:

---

I still disagree, but what you say is fair. One note, though, I think McClure is not overmatched at all at S (maybe last year recovering from injuries). He's a sure tackler and has made plays all year, including a very athletic pass breakup in the end zone tonight.

---

McClure is too slow and unathletic to be a good FBS safety. I don't think we've seen him catch even a RB or TE from behind. He makes up for it with toughness and savy, but we need guys like Thomas DeCoud to compete with the 4 teams you're talking about beating.

okaydo;842603924 said:

---

I agree...and I disagree.

I agree, that, of course we should win one or two of those games. It's really odd that we can't...

But...it's totally understandable.

Sttanford, UCLA, USC and Oregon -- as mentioned above -- are really good teams, even with one of them not having a head coach.

At least some of those teams could be really sh!tty during the Tedford era. But those teams are damn tough to beat nowadays.

-------------

Wait... but Wazzou beat 3 of those teams in the recent past...

Yeah, but Wazzou doesn't have the same connection that we do with USC (which, I believe they don't play every year) and Stanford. Oregon may be a different story.

But Wazzou has been at the bottom of the barrel for a long time, so it's not surpising that when they get some muscle, they could knock people out. What do they have to lose?

-------------

So let's get to the Big 4, one by one:

Startng with: USC:

Cal has beaten USC approximately 1 time in the past 15 seasons.

And that sole win took 3 overtimes to accomplish.

Sure, those losses included many from the Pete Carroll era.

But we're 0-3 vs. Lane Kiffin's Trojans.

And 0-2 vs. interim USC head coaches.

I believe there is a psycholigical hump that Cal has with USC, and it's passed on from team to team.

And I don't believe a Cal football team that was still figuring out how to be a winning team is/was able to get over that psycholigcal barrier.

-------------

Now: UCLA.

I also think there's a psychological hump when it comes to playing in L.A.

Cal has won 1 game in L.A. in the past 15 seasons.

Cal went 0-3 vs. Karl Dorrell's Bruins at the Rose Bowl.

Even Aaron Rodgers couldn't win in L.A.

Again, this is another psychological barrier that I don't believe the 2015 Cal football team was ready to get over.

-------------

Stanford

Stanford is the best team in the conference and one of the best teams in the nation.

Even if they looked beatable last week, this was not the Cal team that was going to beat them.

Even with Goff at the helm, you would need a much superior/veteran team to pull off such an upset.

So it's understandable that we lost.

-------------

Oregon

Utah and Washington State tramped over them, but those two teams don't have the same connection that we do to Oregon.

An Oregon-Cal game is considered somewhat of a rivalry.

Oregon is still a good team, and it's totally understandable that they'd kick our butts.

-------------

Utah

I can't explain Utah. Perhaps the pressure of College Gameday and being ranked for the first time in a long time and Jared Goff taking the time off to film not one but two ESPN featurettes had a role in it.

-------------

In closing, beating our California rivals is hard.

It's even harder when those 3 teams are really, really good.

You know how hard it is to beat our California rivals?

As I mentioned in another thread...

The last time Cal beat USC, UCLA and Stanford in the same season was the year that Joe Kapp led the Bears to the Rose Bowl.

---

Your argument might have more legitimacy if you had acknowledged that WSU's win over UO was over a UO team without its starting QB who returned in time to start against Cal.

gobears725;842603933 said:

---

numberwise hes recruited about 80% of the class right now. even if he closed with all 4 stars, its about the same as last year. theres no see what you can do here, hes already lost this game.

the only way ill back off on his recruiting is if he picks up an assistant known for their recruiting in the offseason. right our best recruiter was a graduate assistant a year ago. we don't have a closer on this staff. we need a tosh without the tosh baggage.

---

Still early. It only takes one spot to pick up the next DeSean Jackson or Marshawn Lynch. We don't need to overhaul the whole roster. We just need a few NFL talents at OT, DE, and DB.

Jo

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603781 said:

---

It would have been nice to beat one if the California schools, but let's face it. Furd, SC, and UCLA are the class of the conference right now.

Of the 5 losses, 4 were on the road. All 5 losses were to teams that were better, more talented, have more expensive coaches, and we're favored against us going into the season and into the games against us. All 5 teams also spent time ranked in the top 10 at some point in the season.

The coaches have turned things around in terms of academics and culture and improved the win total these past 2 years. They've done it with walk-on left tackles, JC plug-ins, converted QB safeties, and athletically limited guys like Hardy Nickerson, Stefan McClure and Cedric Dozier.

Just not getting why everyone is so down on the coaching staff. In the grand scheme of the history of Cal football, this is not that bad of a period.

We're probably a couple of talented OTs and some improved speed on defense from really making noise in the conference. And, this season has gone well enough, especially if we win the bowl game, that we should be able to add some talented athletes in the offseason.

---

Best summary of the season I've read.

Perspective is fine but eventually we need to win against our rivals. Dykes has not shown his ability to do that at all, given the large blown outs we've suffered against them. Beating ASU by 2 pts is great, especially tonight on a huge comeback, but perspective should be taken that it's just ASU as well.

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603942 said:

---

Still early. It only takes one spot to pick up the next DeSean Jackson or Marshawn Lynch. We don't need to overhaul the whole roster. We just need a few NFL talents at OT, DE, and DB.

---

Hope we pick up the next Mebane, or Ziger. DT and LB positions are kinda thin in recruits.
Perhaps, JC will produce some, as has happened before.

Utah, SC and Furd....we competed and just weren't good enough. It happens.

Oregon and UCLA were as down as we are ever going to find them and we got boat raced. Unacceptable.

We handled the 3 terrible/clearly undermanned teams on the schedule. It's always good to take care of business against the teams you should stomp (as opposed to playing down to their level).

We barely beat Texas, UW, ASU and WSU a 3 of 4 are .500 or worse. Good for the team for getting the Ws, but barely beating mediocre to bad teams (the first 3 listed) should give us some perspective.

tequila4kapp;842604099 said:

---

Oregon and UCLA were as down as we are ever going to find them.

---

Not true.

oski003;842604105 said:

---

Not true.

---

I'm not even sure how you can say that. Of course they were.

tequila4kapp;842604099 said:

---

Utah, SC and Furd....we competed and just weren't good enough. It happens.

Oregon and UCLA were as down as we are ever going to find them and we got boat raced. Unacceptable.

We handled the 3 terrible/clearly undermanned teams on the schedule. It's always good to take care of business against the teams you should stomp (as opposed to playing down to their level).

We barely beat Texas, UW, ASU and WSU a 3 of 4 are .500 or worse. Good for the team for getting the Ws, but barely beating mediocre to bad teams (the first 3 listed) should give us some perspective.

---

Yes. The perspective that USC, UCLA and FURD _ALL HAVE A LOT MORE FOOTBALL TALENT_ than we currently do.

Sonny came off a dumpster fire. I have serious doubts about a guy largely with Texas roots and HS coaching relationships recruiting well when it is an absolute IMPERATIVE than you much recruit well in Southern California to make it work at Cal. But as a wise man said, "It isn't about the Xs and Os as much as it is about the BUBBAS and Beuxs"

KoreAmBear;842603888 said:

---

I'm always positive when it comes to each game -- before and during each game I think we're going to win, until we don't. But I'm disagreeing with the notion that Sonny did a good job this year under the circumstances. I think he did a passable job, and I will give him credit for coaching a nice comeback win tonight. However, he has not done a good job against most of the schools that we need to beat to get to the next level. So being shutout v. those teams I mentioned, and being 0-12 v. California Pac-12 and Oregon, is not acceptable. So I disagree that you think all in all Sonny did a good job. Quite frankly you provided him with a lot of excuses (road games, better talent, etc.). At least win one of those games against the upper division type teams. I'm not asking for a sweep. I referred to Wazzu as an example of getting it done at times with inferior talent.

---

Sonny did about the bare minimum for an acceptable season. (Well actually, let's see about the bowl game first -- if we lose to some mid-major school then that might change the equation.)

sycasey;842604118 said:

---

Sonny did about the bare minimum for an acceptable season. (Well actually, let's see about the bowl game first -- if we lose to some mid-major school then that might change the equation.)

---

I just think that is ridiculous. As Goff said, if you count up the number of eight win (Yes, I am assuming a bowl win) Cal teams in the past 50 years it is a short list. Now admittedly we have expanded the season by 2 games (13th and Bowl) but still.

I still am very much a skeptic of the TFS. I do not think it works against upper tier Pac-12 secondaries (aka - NOT ASU) because of just how critical YAC is to making it work. But to go from 1-11 to this in 3 years isn't bad, shows hope, and offers some positive vibes on a Sunday. Lets enjoy, shall we?

socaltownie;842604116 said:

---

Yes. The perspective that USC, UCLA and FURD _ALL HAVE A LOT MORE FOOTBALL TALENT_ than we currently do.

---

We should just pack it in then because several schools in this conference will always have better talent than us. I'm not saying we should win them all - notice I was essentially content to have the team compete against SC and Furd. But it's worth remembering the big justification form TFS is that it would let us win with inferior talent. So far that's been a massive fail (Cal also ran a gimmick offense at the beginning - multiple TEs, heavy running attack, etc. Cal's always going to need some type of unconventional approach to overcome the talent gap.)

socaltownie;842604128 said:

---

I just think that is ridiculous. As Goff said, if you count up the number of eight win (Yes, I am assuming a bowl win) Cal teams in the past 50 years it is a short list. Now admittedly we have expanded the season by 2 games (13th and Bowl) but still.

I still am very much a skeptic of the TFS. I do not think it works against upper tier Pac-12 secondaries (aka - NOT ASU) because of just how critical YAC is to making it work. But to go from 1-11 to this in 3 years isn't bad, shows hope, and offers some positive vibes on a Sunday. Lets enjoy, shall we?

---

1-11 was the record Sonny himself posted. As I've stated many times before, I don't accept using that as a baseline for comparison; a new coach doesn't get to come in, be terrible, and have his subsequent less-terrible seasons compared to that standard. Compare him to how the previous coach did.

As such, Sonny in his first three seasons has basically mirrored Tedford's last three seasons, only his 1-11 was much worse than Tedford's 3-9. He's done the bare minimum.

socaltownie;842604128 said:

---

I just think that is ridiculous. As Goff said, if you count up the number of eight win (Yes, I am assuming a bowl win) Cal teams in the past 50 years it is a short list. Now admittedly we have expanded the season by 2 games (13th and Bowl) but still.

I still am very much a skeptic of the TFS. I do not think it works against upper tier Pac-12 secondaries (aka - NOT ASU) because of just how critical YAC is to making it work. But to go from 1-11 to this in 3 years isn't bad, shows hope, and offers some positive vibes on a Sunday. Lets enjoy, shall we?

---

who cares how many 8 win seasons Cal has had? That's just a justification for ongoing mediocrity. While I didn't think it was realistic personally, most here expected more based on the schedule, QB, depth, etc. FWIW, it may not sound like it to you but based on your second paragraph we are largely in the same camp.

sycasey;842604133 said:

---

1-11 was the record Sonny himself posted. As I've stated many times before, I don't accept using that as a baseline for comparison; a new coach doesn't get to come in, be terrible, and have his subsequent less-terrible seasons compared to that standard. Compare him to how the previous coach did.

As such, Sonny in his first three seasons has basically mirrored Tedford's last three seasons, only his 1-11 was much worse than Tedford's 3-9. He's done the bare minimum.

---

Well you are wrong. The Tedford mess was a HUGE mess. Frankly I think the administration told him to get rid of dead wood that wasn't ready to deal with the more rigorous academics. Then he had to somehow RECRUIT during that dumpster fire.

Where I am guessing we agree is that next year is very important for how Williams should look at Sonny. He will have a new QB (but one that should have at least 1 if not 2 years to understand the system). We should be improved at RB. Unclear at WR (I would note that the replacement guys sorta steped in and equated themselves well). Defense remains a question mark, But if he puts up 6-8 wins NEXT year I think we should ruefully acknowledge that he might know what he is doing. Put up 2-5 and perhaps that will be what Williams needs to see to understand Sonny is a good man but not one for the ages.

tequila4kapp;842604135 said:

---

who cares how many 8 win seasons Cal has had? That's just a justification for ongoing mediocrity. While I didn't think it was realistic personally, most here expected more based on the schedule, QB, depth, etc. FWIW, it may not sound like it to you but based on your second paragraph we are largely in the same camp.

---

I think that you have to understand this is CAL. I know it comes as a shock to those that perhaps came of fandom during Tedford (or those old farts that think that it is 1959 all over again) but we do NOT have a very long and storied football tradition at this school.

This season will be the 17th in the last 50 years that we've managed to win 7 or more games. If we win our bowl and get to 8, it will be only the 10th time in the last 50 years we've managed to win 8 or more.

Simply put, by Cal standards this season has been a success. When you factor in that this team has gotten to 7/8 wins three years after basically pressing reset on the entire program, it says alot about the dedication of our players and coaches. Does that mean that people need to sit back and be content with 7/8 wins? absolutely not. The finish to the Stanford game disgusted me and I still don't know if Sonny is the guy to get us to the top of the North. But has he bought himself more time to continue to build his program? I think he has.

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA;842603781 said:

---

It would have been nice to beat one if the California schools, but let's face it. Furd, SC, and UCLA are the class of the conference right now.

Of the 5 losses, 4 were on the road. All 5 losses were to teams that were better, more talented, have more expensive coaches, and we're favored against us going into the season and into the games against us. All 5 teams also spent time ranked in the top 10 at some point in the season.

The coaches have turned things around in terms of academics and culture and improved the win total these past 2 years. They've done it with walk-on left tackles, JC plug-ins, converted QB safeties, and athletically limited guys like Hardy Nickerson, Stefan McClure and Cedric Dozier.

Just not getting why everyone is so down on the coaching staff. In the grand scheme of the history of Cal football, this is not that bad of a period.

We're probably a couple of talented OTs and some improved speed on defense from really making noise in the conference. And, this season has gone well enough, especially if we win the bowl game, that we should be able to add some talented athletes in the offseason.

---

The SC game was winnable.

mbBear;842604179 said:

---

The SC game was winnable.

---

Maybe. I think that our worst matchups are against BIG offensive lines and against good Defensive secondaries (no YAC).